These are good points which I agree with. We should have an empty burndown list so people trust that flagging an issue will not be ignored.
BEAM-2595: this actually got added to the burndown after the RC was cut. Maybe next time send a mail to the [DISCUSS] thread right away? Otherwise someone could build an RC from an empty burndown and not realize a new issue came up. If it is in master, can you now open a cherry pick? Here's a short link for cherry picks: made https://s.apache.org/beam-2.1.0-cherry-picks. BEAM-2271: the defects described here were actually in RC1, but it got modified to remove them. Since it got past us again, maybe if we have to roll RC2 anyhow it is easy enough to add the exclusions? Validation Process: I like tracking this, but maybe not adding blocking process for it. I think the voting period is enough time to allow someone to check their criteria and call out "-1" if they find an issue. But as part of the discussion and vote, we could have a (fluid) standard set and ask for volunteers to sign up and report on a spreadsheet to avoid duplicated work. Kenn On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 9:15 PM, Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> wrote: > -1 > > Thank you JB. Unfortunately I do not want to approve this RC :(. My reason > is that there are two open issues in the burndown list ( > https://s.apache.org/beam-2.1.0-burndown). I think we should either fix > them or explicitly move them out of the list. BEAM-2595 is a regression in > usability (not in functionality), and it is fixed in master. We could > cherry pick that. BEAM-2271 is an improvement to the release process. I > would prefer fixing the process now instead of the next release cycle. > However, if we want to release sooner, it is fine to clean the zip files > manually. > > Another point I would like to raise is about the validation process. During > 2.0 release we created a list of things to validate before that release. > Should we re-use that list for this and subseqeuent releases? > > Ahmet > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 2.1.0, > > as follows: > > > > [ ] +1, Approve the release > > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) > > > > > > The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes: > > * JIRA release notes [1], > > * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org > > [2], which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3], > > * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4], > > * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC1" [5], > > * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API > > reference manual [6]. > > * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the > > dist.apache.org [2]. > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority > > approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. > > > > Thanks, > > JB > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje > > ctId=12319527&version=12340528 > > [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/ > > [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS > > [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache > beam-1018/ > > [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC1 > > [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270 > > >
